Peyton Manning and Drew Brees may be shooting it out on the field in the Super Bowl coming up, but a future high profile NFL QB will be stirring it up in an ad. No, not in a beer commercial, but in an ad for Focus on the Family (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/jan/26/tebows-pro-life-ad-set-for-super-bowl//print/).


He's not even in the NFL yet, but former University of Florida quarterback Tim Tebow is making a starring appearance at the 2010 Super Bowl in Miami.

While the Indianapolis Colts' Peyton Manning and the New Orleans Saints' Drew Brees will be the quarterbacks on the field, the Heisman Trophy-winning college star will appear with his mother, Pam, on TV in an ad for the pro-life Christian group Focus on the Family that will air during the game.

The 30-second ad's theme is "Celebrate Family, Celebrate Life" and a Focus on the Family press release said the Tebows agreed to the ad because "the issue of life is one they feel strongly about." As a result, the ad is widely expected to focus on Mrs. Tebow's pregnancy with Tim, when she was encouraged by doctors to abort him.

Still, Focus on the Family is keeping the specific content of the ad under wraps until its Feb. 7 debut, in an effort to build anticipation.

"The Tebows, they have a lot of really inspiring stories. And [Mrs. Tebow] and Tim are going to share one of those stories on February the 7th," said Gary Schneeberger, Focus on the Family spokesman.

Jim Daly, president and CEO of Focus on the Family, said in a statement, "Tim and Pam share our respect for life and our passion for helping families thrive."

The Tebows are evangelical Christians who have served as missionaries in the Philippines on numerous occasions and founded the Bob Tebow Evangelistic Association, which continues to evangelize in the Philippines, where Tim was born.

During one of the mission trips, Mrs. Tebow came down with amoebic dysentery and slipped into a coma, requiring a treatment regimen that included strong antibiotics that can damage or kill an unborn child. When Mrs. Tebow learned she was pregnant, doctors advised her to abort the baby, whom she and her husband had prayed for and already named Timothy, she told the Gainesville, Fla., Sun in 2007.

Tim Tebow grew up to be one of the greatest players in college football history — becoming the first sophomore to win the Heisman Trophy as the game's best player, being nominated as a Heisman finalist two other times, and helping lead the Florida Gators to two national titles in his four years at the university.

Tim Tebow has frequently evangelized about of his Christian faith and literally wears it on his face.

He puts the numbers of Bible verses on the black anti-glare patches that players wear under their eyes. In his last college game, a Sugar Bowl victory over Cincinnati, he displayed Ephesians 2:8-10, which reads in part, "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast."

The Tebows' ad will be Colorado-based Focus on the Family's first during a Super Bowl, typically the year's most-watched TV show, with the most expensive advertising rates — from $2.5 million to $3 million for a 30-second ad. The world's biggest companies pay millions of dollars for specialized ad campaigns designed to create buzz separate from the action on the field, particularly if the contest is a blowout.

I think this is awesome, but I bet knees will be jerking from all over left field on this. Oh wait, they already are (http://www.wftv.com/countybycounty/22341704/detail.html).


Jehmu Greene of The Women's Media Center said in a released statement, "An ad that uses sports to divide rather than unite has no place in the biggest national sports event of the year."

The National Organization for Women called the ad "extraordinarily offensive and demeaning."

Since they're keeping the ad under wraps I'm unsure how these groups can launch such criticisms but that's nothing new. Exactly how is telling a personal testimony of how a mother who basically risked everything to have her child - divisive, offensive and demeaning? Maybe next they'll have one from the Palins and Tebows together. :D

A women's organization finds it offensive that a mother made the CHOICE to keep her baby ? I thought they were pro-choice.

If the woman was pro-choice it might be different, but they surely can't have pro-life women making choices on their own, especially choices contrary to what they would have chosen for them.

I read about this today and I don't care at all if they run this commercial. Strange the article I read was more about how much money Tebow will lose in endorsements by doing this commercial. I say good for him for standing up for what he believes even if I disagree with him.

Personally I think they shouldn't run it during the super bowl simply because no one really cares about super bowl commercials anymore. Why spend all that money for a 30 second spot. When you could get so much more use out of that 3 million on any other day.

Funny--the problem that *I* have with Focus on the Family is that they are ANTI-choice. Or rather, they want to eliminate one of the LEGAL choices a woman has.

I am pro-choice. I have no problem with ANY woman choosing adoption, abortion,or parenting--as long as they are parenting NOT on taxpayer money, just like they can't get an abortion with taxpayer money.

I don't have a problem with someone CHOOSING to be pro-life for themselves. What I have a problem with is people who are pro-life CHOOSING that others don't have all of their options.

Our Position (Abortion) (http://www.focusonthefamily.com/socialissues/sanctity-of-life/abortion/our-position.aspx)

You can believe whatever you like--but pro-life groups push to make abortion illegal, which is infringing on MY right to believe what I like. If you don't believe in abortion, then don't have one.

Oh--as far as the "offensive and demeaning" aspect of it--well, I haven't seen the commercial yet. However, I usually am offended by the pro-life attitude that anyone who is pro-choice MUST be a baby-killing maniac with no common sense or morals. At least, that's the way their ads seem to talk down to me.

^^

What she said.

Funny--the problem that *I* have with Focus on the Family is that they are ANTI-choice. Or rather, they want to eliminate one of the LEGAL choices a woman has.

I am pro-choice. I have no problem with ANY woman choosing adoption, abortion,or parenting--as long as they are parenting NOT on taxpayer money, just like they can't get an abortion with taxpayer money.

I don't have a problem with someone CHOOSING to be pro-life for themselves. What I have a problem with is people who are pro-life CHOOSING that others don't have all of their options.

Our Position (Abortion) (http://www.focusonthefamily.com/socialissues/sanctity-of-life/abortion/our-position.aspx)

You can believe whatever you like--but pro-life groups push to make abortion illegal, which is infringing on MY right to believe what I like. If you don't believe in abortion, then don't have one.

Oh--as far as the "offensive and demeaning" aspect of it--well, I haven't seen the commercial yet. However, I usually am offended by the pro-life attitude that anyone who is pro-choice MUST be a baby-killing maniac with no common sense or morals. At least, that's the way their ads seem to talk down to me.

As I said in the OP no one has seen the ad, so why the rant? Focus on the Family can't have a position? You can't handle them expressing their belief without feeling offended?

How should I feel when pro-choice groups treat me as an irresponsible lunatic that only divides and is "extraordinarily offensive and demeaning" without having an ounce of evidence to base it on?

Well guess what, we don't have the right to not be offended, and if one side can fight to keep at-will abortions of any kind for any reason legal, then the other side can darn sure fight against it. Pro-lifers don't have a monopoly on intolerance...

Another question, are you pro-choicers afraid that someone telling their story of how they went against the doctor's recommendation at great risk, with great faith to bring their child into the world might inspire someone else to do the same?

Nope.

I'm afraid that someone telling their story of not choosing abortion and instead parenting that child and having that child end up being famous enough to be on TV will cause a whole SLEW of single 15 year old girls to get pregnant, stay pregnant, and use my tax dollars to raise the kid on Welfare because ONE mother made it work.

It's like saying that showing Jesus walking on water during the Superbowl would have a whole bunch of idiots drowning trying to do the same thing because ONE extraordinary person could.

Why so little faith in people? I don't want to add to welfare rolls or encourage teens to get pregnant any more than the next person, but I think it's a pitiful excuse to discourage women from giving the child in their womb a chance. That child could be a Heisman winner like Tebow - or something much greater.

However, your rant indicates something much deeper, and I noticed you didn't answer my response to it.

However, your rant indicates something much deeper, and I noticed you didn't answer my response to it.Every one of your threads is a rant as well but you're the pot calling the kettle black here - don't you have some vested interest in any abortion discussion?

Why so MUCH faith in people?

Some women who choose abortion do so because they are giving THEMSELVES a chance.

Why is a fetus more important than the mother?

I think you forget sometimes that I'm in a unique position on the whole thing: a teenage mother who chose NOT to get an abortion, but chose adoption, and is now dealing with infertility issues. I think that I've had a very INTIMATE relationship with the whole issue--and STILL think that the choice of the mother should come first.

Frankly, though, we could get rid of the abortion problem entirely if we just had laws on who could and could not have children to begin with.

Every one of your threads is a rant as well but you're the pot calling the kettle black here

Oh really (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/why-would-he-say-437956.html#post2193151)?


don't you have some vested interest in any abortion discussion?


What person that gives a damn one way or the other doesn't? I'd be content to just sit back and watch you pro-choicers make the point for me for a while, you're doing a great job of it so far.

Why so MUCH faith in people?

Some women who choose abortion do so because they are giving THEMSELVES a chance.

Why is a fetus more important than the mother?

I think you forget sometimes that i'm in a unique position on the whole thing: a teenage mother who chose NOT to get an abortion, but chose adoption, and is now dealing with infertility issues. I think that I've had a very INTIMATE relationship with the whole issue--and STILL think that the choice of the mother should come first.

Frankly, though, we could get rid of the abortion problem entirely if we just had laws on who could and could not have children to begin with.

See my last response to NK. Meanwhile, I'll be waiting for you to respond to my first response to you also.

See my last response to NK. Meanwhile, I'll be waiting for you to respond to my first response to you also.

What?

Your response to NK makes absolutely no sense to me in relation to the response I gave you.

I am far too close to this entire issue at the moment to form a coherent reply to you. I shouldn't have responded in the first place. My emotions are far too tied up in the entire thing right now for me to be at all rational in a discussion.

It is awesome, and I love happy endings! Glad they will get a chance to share their personal good fortune.

It is awesome, and I love happy endings! Glad they will get a chance to share their personal good fortune.

The outrage is way premature, I find it so laughable that people are actually worried that, as the AP put it, the ad will "use Tebow and his mother to convey a pro-life message." Oooh, how outrageous. Better to stick with wardrobe malfunctions and beer commercials for our kids.

This is what Palin said on her Facebook page



NOW is looking at the pro-life issue backwards. Women should be reminded that they are strong enough and smart enough to make decisions that allow for career and educational opportunities while still giving their babies a chance at life...


My message to these groups who are inexplicably offended by a pro-woman, pro-child, pro-life message airing during the Super Bowl: please concentrate on empowering women, help with efforts to prevent unexpected pregnancies, stay consistent with your message that for too long women have been made to feel like sex objects in our “modern” culture and that we can expect better in 2010.

Personally I think Tebow is doing it just so he will be associated as a QB at least once on super bowl Sunday . Have you seen the tape of him at the senior bowl practices?? He can not play under center and will never be a QB in the NFL. Tight end maybe running back probably QB no way.

But seriously the reality is they are going to have a 30 second spot during the Superbowl. Half the people who are going to see it will be drunk and not even remember they saw it. The other half will forget about it after the Budweiser Clydesdale's fetch a tree or play football or whatever they are doing this year.

And come to think of it I will bet that the Tebow commercial is ran Long BEFORE the opening kick off when there are even less people watching. So as usual with superbowl commercials the pregame hype will be better then the actual commercial.

...stay consistent with your message that for too long women have been made to feel like sex objects in our “modern” culture and that we can expect better in 2010

rSdFIDygFwM


She's such an idiot. LOL!

Good points all. However ;it is the women's groups that have their dander up over it. There was no hype at all until they proclaimed it an outrage.

My own thinking on this is CBS is using Pete Townsend ;a registered sex offender ,for their half time entertainment . Tebow just provides some balance.:D

As far as Tebow's skill levels go; a strong arm like his makes up for a whole lot of other deficienies. Someone with his athletic abilities;his size and strength can be taught to take a snap from the center .

You are right ;he's probably not a top tier prospect because he spent his whole career in a shot-gun system. But an NFL team could do worse than drafting him for his abilities . Alex Smith came from a similar system ;Ryan Leaf and JaMarcus Russell were high draft picks and I think Tebow at least has their skill level.

I think a team should draft him in the 3rd or 4th round (if he is there). Give him a few years let him develop nobody does that anymore it is either sink or swim. But if I were the Dolphins I would draft him. Put him Ronnie brown and Pat White in the back field and I don't think any team would have a clue how to stop it. Or maybe the Raiders will draft him number 8 make him start ruin his confidence and he will be out of the league in 3 years.

The Giants could do worse than to have a wild cat option in their playbook. Would also make Eli look over his shoulders.

Either way ; a Heisman trophy 2 national championships and too many SEC records to count. I'm sure there is a team willing to take a chance. Marino took a large percentage of his snaps in the shotgun... so does Peyton Manning .

Espn is taking a poll which is the bigger story about Tebow: the super bowl ad or his draft stock plummeting. Overwhelmingly america cares more about his draft status.

ESPN.com Poll Results by State (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/fp/flashPollResultsState?sportIndex=frontpage&pollId=85445)

Well I hear the Cards could use another QB. Oh wait, they already have Leinert. At least hopefully he won't end up as another Ryan Leaf, who as you may or may not know had his last chance at the DII school down the street from me but blew it after a burglary looking for drugs.

Finally, a voice of reason from the pro-choice crowd:


Tebow's Super Bowl ad isn't intolerant; its critics are (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/01/AR2010020102067.html)

By Sally Jenkins
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, February 2, 2010

I'll spit this out quick, before the armies of feminism try to gag me and strap electrodes to my forehead: Tim Tebow is one of the better things to happen to young women in some time. I realize this stance won't endear me to the "Dwindling Organizations of Ladies in Lockstep," otherwise known as DOLL, but I'll try to pick up the shards of my shattered feminist credentials and go on.

As statements at Super Bowls go, I prefer the idea of Tebow's pro-life ad to, say, Jim McMahon dropping his pants, as the former Chicago Bears quarterback once did in response to a question. We're always harping on athletes to be more responsible and engaged in the issues of their day, and less concerned with just cashing checks. It therefore seems more than a little hypocritical to insist on it only if it means criticizing sneaker companies, and to stifle them when they take a stance that might make us uncomfortable.

I'm pro-choice, and Tebow clearly is not. But based on what I've heard in the past week, I'll take his side against the group-think, elitism and condescension of the [I"National Organization of Fewer and Fewer Women All The Time."[/I] For one thing, Tebow seems smarter than they do.

Tebow's 30-second ad hasn't even run yet, but it already has provoked "The National Organization for Women Who Only Think Like Us" to reveal something important about themselves: They aren't actually "pro-choice" so much as they are pro-abortion. Pam Tebow has a genuine pro-choice story to tell. She got pregnant in 1987, post-Roe v. Wade, and while on a Christian mission in the Philippines, she contracted a tropical ailment. Doctors advised her the pregnancy could be dangerous, but she exercised her freedom of choice and now, 20-some years later, the outcome of that choice is her beauteous Heisman Trophy winner son, a chaste, proselytizing evangelical.

Pam Tebow and her son feel good enough about that choice to want to tell people about it. Only, NOW says they shouldn't be allowed to. Apparently NOW feels this commercial is an inappropriate message for America to see for 30 seconds, but women in bikinis selling beer is the right one. I would like to meet the genius at NOW who made that decision. On second thought, no, I wouldn't.

There's not enough space in the sports pages for the serious weighing of values that constitutes this debate, but surely everyone in both camps, pro-choice or pro-life, wishes the "need" for abortions wasn't so great. Which is precisely why NOW is so wrong to take aim at Tebow's ad.

Here's what we do need a lot more of: Tebows. Collegians who are selfless enough to choose not to spend summers poolside, but travel to impoverished countries to dispense medical care to children, as Tebow has every summer of his career. Athletes who believe in something other than themselves, and are willing to put their backbone where their mouth is. Celebrities who are self-possessed and self-controlled enough to use their wattage to advertise commitment over decadence.

You know what we really need more of? Famous guys who aren't embarrassed to practice sexual restraint, and to say it out loud. If we had more of those, women might have fewer abortions. See, the best way to deal with unwanted pregnancy is to not get the sperm in the egg and the egg implanted to begin with, and that is an issue for men, too -- and they should step up to that.

"Are you saving yourself for marriage?" Tebow was asked last summer during an SEC media day.

"Yes, I am," he replied.

The room fell into a hush, followed by tittering: The best college football player in the country had just announced he was a virgin. As Tebow gauged the reaction from the reporters in the room, he burst out laughing. They were a lot more embarrassed than he was.

"I think y'all are stunned right now!" he said. "You can't even ask a question!"

That's how far we've come from any kind of sane viewpoint about star athletes and sex. Promiscuity is so the norm that if a stud isn't shagging everything in sight, we feel faintly ashamed for him.

Obviously Tebow can make people uncomfortable, whether it's for advertising his chastity, or for wearing his faith on his face via biblical citations painted in his eye-black. Hebrews 12:12, his cheekbones read during the Florida State game: "Therefore strengthen your feeble arms and weak knees." His critics find this intrusive, and say the Super Bowl is no place for an argument of this nature. "Pull the ad," NOW President Terry O'Neill said. "Let's focus on the game."

Trouble is, you can't focus on the game without focusing on the individuals who play it -- and that is the genius of Tebow's ad. The Super Bowl is not some reality-free escape zone. Tebow himself is an inescapable fact: Abortion doesn't just involve serious issues of life, but of potential lives, Heisman trophy winners, scientists, doctors, artists, inventors, Little Leaguers -- who would never come to be if their birth mothers had not wrestled with the stakes and chosen to carry those lives to term. And their stories are every bit as real and valid as the stories preferred by NOW.

Let me be clear again: I couldn't disagree with Tebow more. It's my own belief that the state has no business putting its hand under skirts. But I don't care that we differ. Some people will care that the ad is paid for by Focus on the Family, a group whose former spokesman, James Dobson, says loathsome things about gays. Some will care that Tebow is a creationist. Some will care that CBS has rejected a gay dating service ad. None of this is the point. CBS owns its broadcast and can run whatever advertising it wants, and Tebow has a right to express his beliefs publicly. Just as I have the right to reject or accept them after listening -- or think a little more deeply about the issues. If the pro-choice stance is so precarious that a story about someone who chose to carry a risky pregnancy to term undermines it, then CBS is not the problem.

Tebow's ad, by the way, never mentions abortion; like the player himself, it's apparently soft-spoken. It simply has the theme "Celebrate Family, Celebrate Life." This is what NOW has labeled "extraordinarily offensive and demeaning." But if there is any demeaning here, it's coming from NOW, via the suggestion that these aren't real questions, and that we as a Super Bowl audience are too stupid or too disinterested to handle them on game day.


Amen sister. And if you want to have a little fun watch Megyn Kelly smack down Gloria Allred (http://video.foxnews.com/v/3997121/debating-tebows-super-bowl-ad).

What are they afraid of? That someone who is planning on having an abortion might change their mind? Being able to change your mind is all part of pro choice, isn't it?

Who says we're afraid of anything?

I seem to recall--though I can't find links now--that a birth control or Planned Parenthood ad was to run during the Superbowl a couple-few years ago, and was nixed, because it wasn't "appropriate" to the family oriented audience.

Yet talking about abortion IS?

I haven't seen the ad. I'll tell you what I think when I see the ad.

However--this pro-life group just opened the doors for OTHER groups, like Planned Parenthood, to get THEIR message aired at a time when more people watch commercials than any other time of the year.

Way to ruin my only reason for watching the Superbowl--the commercials. I want them AMUSING, not political.

Afraid was a poor choice of words

I just don't understand if someone is pro choice why they would object to a Focus on the Family and/or pro life commercial. I am pro choice and I have no objection to anyone presenting evidence against abortion, or alternatives to abortion.

I really think they should save the money. 3 million for a 30 second spot that most people won't see cause they are going to the bathroom. Won't remember cause they are drunk. Then you have the Tebow haters that will say his mom should have aborted him (I imagine those people will be alums of 'BAMA, FSU, WVU etc... ) So basically in the end a few people will see it, it will not change anyone's minds and that will be the end of it.

I am more concerned how long the National Anthem will take I got money on that. I say OVER a minute and Forty two seconds!!

Who says we're afraid of anything?

I seem to recall--though I can't find links now--that a birth control or Planned Parenthood ad was to run during the Superbowl a couple-few years ago, and was nixed, because it wasn't "appropriate" to the family oriented audience.

Yet talking about abortion IS?

I haven't seen the ad. I'll tell you what I think when I see the ad.

However--this pro-life group just opened the doors for OTHER groups, like Planned Parenthood, to get THEIR message aired at a time when more people watch commercials than any other time of the year.

Way to ruin my only reason for watching the Superbowl--the commercials. I want them AMUSING, not political.

Synnen, the whole thing here (besides jumping to a gazillion conclusions) is these "pro-choice" groups are directing their anger at the wrong target. If they don't like it they need to protest to CBS, THEY made the decision to run the ad as does every network that airs the Super Bowl.

If the network wouldn't run the PP ad it was the network that made the decision and I'd bet the anger was directed at the network. In this case everyone is jumping all over Focus on the Family and the Tebows. That's just wrong.

Btw, that's the beauty of DVR's, I only watch what I want to.

I really think they should save the money. 3 million for a 30 second spot that most people won't see cause they are going to the bathroom. Won't remember cause they are drunk. Then you have the Tebow haters that will say his mom should have aborted him (I imagine those people will be alums of 'BAMA, FSU, WVU etc...) So basically in the end a few people will see it, it will not change anyone's minds and that will be the end of it.

I am more concerned how long the National Anthem will take I got money on that. I say OVER a minute and Forty two seconds!!!!!

Spit, there's been so much crap stirred up over this by the, how did that writer put it, the "Dwindling Organizations of Ladies in Lockstep," that there will be people tune in just to watch that ad.

By the way, who's doing the anthem? I think they should just do away with celebrities massacring the anthem at the Super Bowl and get some military drum and bugle corps to do it every year. My bet wouldn't be the length, but whether the singer can pronounce "perilous." I'd bet no.

And by the way, I'm sure the PP crowd is totally upset now that a study has shown that abstinence works best (http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/02/02/abstinence.study/) for youth.

Just wait and see what happens after the game. Gloria Alred has threatened suit claiming the whole thing is faked. I guess they are getting their monies worth in publicity out of this one for sure. Guesstimates are 2 - 2.5 million dollars for the commercial.

Meh... I already boycott CBS. I've not watched them at all since the "Mentalist" episode where they got Wicca entirely wrong, then refused to apologize to the pagan community--I think that's going on at least a year and a half now, maybe 2 years.

I probably won't watch the Superbowl, but will have fun with a couple of friends watching the commercials---IF they're not too lame by the end of the first quarter. They seem to get stupider and more conservative every year.

So--I'd write CBS and complain, but I already know that my complaints will fall on deaf ears, so I won't bother.

I had FAR more luck complaining to the sponsors of that show, really. At least I got responses to those I wrote, even if the response was a form letter.

I agree, though--the $30 million could be MUCH better spent taking care of about 100 kids for the rest of their LIVES whose mommies weren't strong enough to choose adoption even though they "at least didn't abort".

Speech Carrie Underwood is singing the National Anthem. I think she will do it justice.

IO enjoy some of the versions loath most. For my money they should just dust off a Robert Merrill recording of the Anthem.
YouTube - National Anthem at the New Yankee Stadium (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4d7aVIVTzsQ)

Speech Carrie Underwood is singing the National Anthem. I think she will do it justice.

Female country singers generally do a great job. LeAnn Rimes has done it at several Cowboys games we attended and did a fabulous job. Seems I've heard Reba do it there a time or two as well.

I'm all for Ted Nugent handling the duty :D

I am all for Ted Nugents crazy @$$ doing the Anthem.

The best part of this commercial was if NOW didn't make a big deal out of it no one would have known what they were talking about.

Here are the two ultra offensive Tebow ads:

je0lYPUvTZc

iwUehWBhfGA

And what was the knee-jerk hype from feminists?

The National Organization for Women called the ad "extraordinarily offensive and demeaning.

Erin Matson of NOW, called the Tebow spot "hate masquerading as love."

Jehmu Greene of The Women's Media Center said, "An ad that uses sports to divide rather than unite has no place in the biggest national sports event of the year."

The best they can answer with now is Greene said, said the tackle showed an undercurrent of violence against women (http://www.latimes.com/sports/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-us-super-bowl-focus-on-the-family,0,6898849.story).

"I think they're attempting to use humor as another tactic of hiding their message and fooling the American people," she said.

LOL, who's trying to fool the American people?

Tebow was drafted in the 1st round by the Denver Broncos. The 25th player selected; he was the second Quarterback selected after number one pick Sam Bradford of Oklahoma went to the Rams.

Apparently his reworking of his throwing motion must have impressed someone. Who'd the Gnats get? The Boys did a good thing (hopefully) in taking WR Dez Bryant.

The Gnats went almost exlusively Defense .1st round they picked Jason Pierre-Paul ;an unseasoned but extremely tall athletic DE from the University of South Florida.It is a gamble pick .I've seen the Giants pick the "worlds greatest athlete before and get burned;but if he pans out then they have a replacement for that baby Osi .

2nd round they picked monster DT Linval Joseph from East Carolina..

3rd they picked Safety/Return Specialist Chad Jones from LSU (possibly their best pick)

4th they picked up a MLB replacement for Pierce... Phillip Dillard from Nebraska .

In the 5th they got another good one and finally addressed an offensive concern by grabbing Guard Mitch Petrus from Arkansas .

They picked up another LB next and; then surprised us in the final round by picking a punter, and announcing that Jeff Feagles has some health problems and he was going to retire.

If Pierre-Paul is as advertised then maybe the gnats D rebounds to playoff caliber .

I haven't analyzed the rest of the Boys' draft yet, we're still working on getting last year's class on the field. But if Bryant lives up to his billing you're going to need that D :)

Bryant... the next Roy Williams ?:D

They must think highly of him giving him the number 88 .

The question isn't is he the next Roy Williams, it's is he the next Antonio Bryant - also given the 88.

My guess is that you are hoping he's the next Drew Pearson or Michael Irvin .

That would be an accurate guess. He certainly has the tools to do so.

Tebow Time has begun (?? )

Chargers hold off Broncos and Tim Tebow ? USATODAY.com (http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/story/2011-10-09/chargers-broncos/50713308/1)

Tebow time may wreak havoc as you well know on Brandon Lloyd time and the upstart Eric Decker time. I probably lost 2 games thanks to the change. Decker had scored 2 TDs twice this year, but had 2 catches for -4 yards yesterday. But hey, Bronco fans are excited.

I think in the long run they are targets he'll hit more often than Orton.

Probably so, but for now I'll watch and wait where I can. Hey, he nailed that throw to the tight end and got Moreno in on the act so who knows?